Tennessee IP Law Blog

Atari Interactive, Inc. v. Hyperkin Inc. , No. 219CV00608CASAFMX, 2020 WL 4287584 (C.D. Cal. July 27, 2020). https://www.logolounge.com/articles/the-origin-of-the-atari-logo PART I of III - Background Topic:     Trade Dress - Video Game Controllers I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Atari Interactive, Inc. (“Atari Interactive”) filed this action against defendant Hyperkin Inc. (“Hyperkin”) on January 25, 2019. Atari Interactive asserts claims for: (1) false designation of origin, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a); (2) common law unfair competition; and (3) trademark dilution, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c). Hyperkin filed an answer on March 21, 2019. The gravamen of Atari Interactive's claims is that Hyperkin's videogame console and joystick controller infringe Atari Interactive's trade dress in Atari Interactive's own console and joystick controller. Hyperkin filed a motion for summary judgment on June 1, 2020, and a statement of uncontroverted facts and conclusions of l...

Blumenthal Distrib., Inc. v. Herman Miller, Inc. , No. 18-56471, 2020 WL 3458983 (9th Cir. June 25, 2020) https://design-middleeast.com/herman-millers-cosm-wins-red-dot-award-as-best-office-chair/ Topic: Trademarks - Trade Dress Functionality Takeaways: Arrangements of individual functional (non-protectable) elements in furniture can come together to create a nonfunctional appearance that is protectable. "Household name" level of fame is required to make a claim for trade dress dilution for 9th Circuit under Thane v. Trek Herman Miller, Inc. (“HM”) sells Eames chairs and Aeron chairs. On December 13, 2013, HM sent a cease-and-desist letter to Blumenthal Distributing, Inc., d/b/a Office Star Products (“OSP”), accusing OSP of selling “knockoff” chairs that look like HM's Eames and Aeron chairs. The letter alleged infringement of HM's rights in the EAMES and AERON trade dresses under the Lanham Act. Litigation ensued, culminating in a jury trial on ...

VIP Prods. LLC v. Jack Daniel’s Properties, Inc. , No. 18-16012 (9th Cir. Mar. 31, 2020) Topic: Trademark Infringement, Parodies The panel affirmed in part, vacated in part, and reversed in part the district court’s judgment after a bench trial and permanent injunction in favor of Jack Daniel’s Properties, Inc., in a trademark suit brought by VIP Products, LLC, concerning VIP’s “Bad Spaniels Silly Squeaker” dog toy, which resembled a bottle of Jack Daniel’s Old No. 7 Black Label Tennessee Whiskey but had light-hearted, dog-related alterations.  The panel affirmed the district court’s summary judgment in favor of Jack Daniel’s on the issues of aesthetic functionality and distinctiveness. The panel held that the district court correctly found that Jack Daniel’s trade dress and bottle design were distinctive and aesthetically nonfunctional, and thus entitled to trademark protection.  Accordingly, the district court correctly rejected VIP’s request for cancellation of...